Modeling Requirements of Future-Oriented Policymaking for Petroleum Industry

Document Type : Research Article

Authors

1 university of allame tabatabai

2 professormanagement Allameh Tabatabaei University

3 Associate Professor, faculty of management, Allameh Tabataba'i University

4 Associate Professor, faculty of management, Allameh Tabatabae'i University

Abstract

Purpose of this study was to identify the future-oriented policymaking requirements in the oil industry using a qualitative method. Grounded theory strategy has been used, given the lack of theoretical development and the necessity of theorizing in this field. 21 in-depth interview was conducted with a diverse range of experts with relevant experience from petroleum industry to policy centers out of petroleum industry, including the Islamic Consultative Assembly, the Parliamentary Research Center and as well as academics. Data analysis led to the emergence of 277 initial codes, 31 sub categories and 10 main categories. Finally the logical diagram of the relationship between the categories and four main statements appeared. As a result, dimensions and indicators of future-oriented policymaking, as well as "structural", "process" and "content" requirements of it were identified that are necessary conditions of future-oriented policymaking. "Creating change estimation system" and "creating response to change signals system" were identified as strategies for advancing future-oriented policy-making or its adequate conditions. Two categories of contextual factors was identified, including "context of proprietary environment" and "general context". Implementation of strategies leads to two categories of "individual" and "organizational" outcomes.

Keywords

References

1- دلشاد تهرانی، مصطفی (1383)، «سیره نبوی، منطق عملی: دفترسوم سیره مدیریتی»، انتشارات دریا.
2- مردوخی، بایزید. (1392)، روش‌شناسی ‌آینده‌نگری، نشرنی.
 
3- Bradfield, R., Wright, G., Burt, G., Cairns, G. and Heijden, K. Van Der. (2005), "The origins and evolution of scenario techniques in long range business planning", Futures, 37, 795–812.
4- Coates, J. F. (2010), "The future of foresight—A US perspective", Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 77, 1428–1437.
5- Corbin J. and Strauss, A. (2015), Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory, 4th Edition.
6- Creswell, J. W. and Poth, C. N. (2018), Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches, 4th Edition, Sage.
7- Da Costa, O.Warnke, P., Cagnin C. and Scapolo, F. (2008), "The impact of foresight on policy-making: insights from the FORLEARN mutual learning process", Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, Vol. 20, No. 3, May 2008, 369–387.
8- Dolan T. E., (2014), "Does the principle of informed consent apply to futures studies research?", Futures, In Press
9- Duin, P. van der., Hazeu, C. A., Rademaker, P. and Schoonenboom, J.S."The future revisited, looking back at the next 25 years by the Dutch Scientific Council for Governmental Policy (WRR)", Futures, 38, (3), 235–246.
10- Dunn, W. N. (2012) Public Policy Analysis, 5th Edition, Routledge.
11- Fuerth, L (2009), "Foresight and anticipatory governance", Foresight, vol. 11 no. 4, pp. 14-32.
12- Habegger, B. (2010), “Strategic foresight in public policy: Reviewing the experiences of the UK, Singapore, and the Netherlands”, Futures, 42, 49–58.
13- Hove, S. (2007), “A rationale for science–policy interfaces”, Futures, 39, 807–826.
14- Hughes, N. (2013), “Towards improving the relevance of scenarios for public policy questions: A proposed methodological framework for policy relevant low carbon scenarios”, Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 80, 687–698.
15- Leigh. A, (2003) "Thinking Ahead: Strategic Foresight and Government", Australian Journal of Public Administration, 62(2):3–10.
16- Miles, I., Saritas, O. and Sokolov, A. (2016), Foresight for Science, Technology and Innovation, Springer International Publishing Switzerland.
17- Nehme, C. C., Santos, M. de M., Filho, L. F. and Coelho, G. M. (2012), “Challenges in communicating the outcomes of a foresight study to advise decision-makers on policy and strategy”, Science and Public Policy, 39, pp. 245–257.
18- Reed, M. S., Kenter, J., Bonn, A., Broad, K., Burt, T. P., Fazey, I. R., Fraser, E. D. G., Hubacek, K., Nainggolan, D., Quinn, C. H., Stringer, L. C. and Ravera F. (2013), "Participatory scenario development for environmental management: A methodological framework illustrated with experience from the UK uplands", Journal of Environmental Management, 128, pp. 345-362
19- Rijkens-Klomp, N. (2012) "Barriers and levers to future exploration in practice experiences in policy-making", Futures, 44, 431–439.
20- Saldana, J. (2016), The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. 3rd Edition, Sage.
21- Son, H. (2015), The history of Western futures studies: An exploration of the intellectual traditions and three-phase periodization, Futures, Vol. 66, P. 120-137.
22- Steen, M. van der and Twist, M van (2012), "Beyond use: Evaluating foresight that fits", Futures, 44, 475–486.
23- Steen, M. van der and Twist, M van (2013), "Foresight and long-term policy-making: An analysis of anticipatory boundary work in policy organizations in The Netherlands", Futures, 54, 33–42.
24- Veenman S. A. (2013), "Futures studies and uncertainty in public policy: A case study on the ageing population in the Netherlands", Futures, 53, 42–52.
Iranian Journal of Public Policy
Volume 5, Issue 3
2018
Pages 43-59

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics